Slava wrote:Given that there are so many ages at which young people are allowed to do certain things, is the concept of reaching one's "majority" a dead one?

This also applies in a way to "minor," though under 18 is still a solid break point.

However, there seems to be no modern use for majority.

Comments?

Slava

If one is over the age,no, if under yes, most still take 21 as the ae of majority, while it is not a majority anymore [mad-ave-wise] it is still the age at which one is to assume responsibility for one's actions, not necessarily the age of maturity*.

[disclaimer] this preceeding was an editorial comment[/disclaimer]

mark mature-not-in-the-'good'-sense Bailey

Today is the first day of the rest of your life, Make the most of it...kb

Bailey wrote: . . . If one is over the age,no, if under yes, most still take 21 as the ae of majority, while it is not a majority anymore [mad-ave-wise] it is still the age at which one is to assume responsibility for one's actions, not necessarily the age of maturity*.

[disclaimer] this preceeding was an editorial comment[/disclaimer]

mark mature-not-in-the-'good'-sense Bailey

Disclaimer duly noted.

Twenty-one is not the age at which one assumes responsibility for one's actions. One always has to assume responsibily for one's actions, even the toddler caught with his hands in the cookie jar before dinner.

See also the story of Lee Boyd Malvo in the Beltway Sniper case of a few years ago.

From the Wikipedia article on Malvo:

On March 1, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in Roper v. Simmons that the Eighth Amendment prohibits execution for crimes committed when under the age of 18. As Malvo was 17 when he committed the crimes, cannot face the death penalty, but still may be extradited to Alabama, Louisiana, and other states for prosecution. At the outset of the Beltway sniper prosecutions, the primary reason for extraditing the two suspects from Maryland, where they were arrested, to Virginia, was, in fact, the differences in how the two states deal with the death penalty. While the death penalty is allowed in Maryland, it was only applied to persons who were adults at the time of their crimes, whereas Virginia had also allowed the death penalty for offenders who had been juveniles when their crimes were committed.

Cigarettes are now limited to those 18 and over in the US (I used to buy tobacco when I was 16), and alcohol (again in the US), is restricted to those 21 and older.

Back in ancient times (the 1960s and 1970s), the various states had different age requirements for alcohol consumption. In Washington DC and New York the age was 18 while in other states such as Maryland and Virginia it was 21.

The way the law is now, a soldier aged 18 through 20 is old enough to die for his or her country in Iraq or Afghanistan, but is not old enough to consume a beer at home.

Regards//Larry

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -- Attributed to Richard Henry Lee

Bailey wrote: . . . If one is over the age,no, if under yes, most still take 21 as the ae of majority, while it is not a majority anymore [mad-ave-wise] it is still the age at which one is to assume responsibility for one's actions, not necessarily the age of maturity*.

Twenty-one is not the age at which one assumes responsibility for one's actions. One always has to assume responsibily for one's actions, even the toddler caught with his hands in the cookie jar before dinner.

Actually with parents covering up for their children; many aren't learning any responsibility, absentee patents expecting the village to create their characters..
I wasn't referring to the law, neceassarily. At 21 one is given more priviledges and expected to live up to them. [ live up is of course the optimal phrase here]

mark flubbered Bailey

Today is the first day of the rest of your life, Make the most of it...kb